Spiro Zavos

By Spiro Zavos
December 17th 2007 @ 4:52am


ADVERTISEMENT

Twenty20 cricket - 6 tactics for winning

Australian batsman Andrew Symonds during play - AAP Image/Tony McDonough
Is Twenty20 cricket nothing much more than a slogathon, a sort of cricketing version of a bar room brawl? Or is it a cricketing version of speed chess?

When Michael Clarke was appointed the Australian captain (temporary?) for the Twenty20 match against New Zealand at Perth, Ricky Ponting applauded the choice on the grounds that Clarke was an ‘instinctive’ cricketer whose instincts are generally correct. The implication in this (and I trust I am not drawing too long a bow) is that the Twenty20 game is so fast that decisions must be ‘instinctive’ than carefully worked out along tactical lines.

Michael Slater endorsed this approach to the game when he introduced the game on Channel 9 by describing Twenty20 cricket as ‘rock n roll cricket.’

But when he discussed with Adam Gilchrist what instructions he’d been given, Gilchrist said that he was told to take as many singles as possible. This suggested to me that the Australian coaching staff has worked out a form of tactical approach to the game. Which in turn suggests that the speed chess analogy is probably the correct one.

The Twenty20 game involves the batting side having 20 overs to score a total. Bowlers are only allowed four overs each which means that five bowlers at a minimum must be used. There are restricted field placings for the first six overs. But within this restriction there is no requirement for any fielders to to be placed in a catching position.

Now for some tentative thoughts, very tentative it must be emphasised, towards an understanding of a tactical approach to Twenty20 cricket.

1. The approach of the batting side should be to score 9 runs an over. This would provide a total of about 180 runs which would generally be defendable.

2. Bill O’Reilly claimed that the 50 over one-day format was biased towards batting. He argued that a team of 11 batsmen should be selected, with the batsmen having instructions to hit everything all the time. The 10 overs allocated to each bowler though somewhat scuttled the theory. A great bowler, or a good bowler having a great day, has sufficient balls (60) to take up to five wickets. But in the Twenty20 game this is not possible. Bowlers have only 24 balls each to bowl whereas a batsman may have up to 60 balls to face. It is the Twenty20 game, therefore, that is the loaded towards the batting side.

3. Fast bowlers and spinners are more effective in the Twenty20 game than medium-pacers. As the Australian fast attack demonstrated at Perth, the fact that each bowler had only 24 balls to deliver allowed the quickies to let fly right from the beginning. And the NZ spinners were more effective than the side’s medium pace bowlers because they took wickets and were able to place fields that covered the big outfield at Perth more effectively than the medium pacers could.

4. With the relative innocuousness of the medium pacers it seems that it might be better to stack a side with batsmen, allowing for only three front line bowlers say. It is hard to dismiss a side, 10 wickets required in only 120 balls, so batting sides can afford to keep hitting relentlessly. Bowling sides should rely on the three front line bowlers to keep the batsmen honest. Captains should perhaps experiment with most of the side having a bowl, working on the theory that mediocre bowling is about as ‘useful’ as ordinary medium pace stuff.

4. On field placing, I’d place my fielders inside the circle, or on the circle line itself. This would mean that the only close catcher, apart from the bowler, is the wicket-keeper. Having the inner ring fieldsmen on the circle should mean fewer fours and probably fewer singles. The thought here is that any ball that is restricted to a scoring shot of one run is a victory to the bowling side, and any scoring shot above two is a victory to the batting side.

5. To bat or to field if the toss is won? Always bat, in my view. The batting side has the opportunity of setting a target. Conversely, the bowling side confronting a side batting first does not know how valid that target will be. This poses questions about which bowlers to use towards the end of an innings. The side fielding second has no such doubts. It knows the target. It knows how the opposition is progressing towards the target. It can, therefore, use its bowling attack in the most effective way possible in preventing the target being reached.

6. All the batsmen should be capable of hitting sixes. I don’t know what the statistics are but I’d be surprised if the side that hit the most sixes didn’t win most of the Twenty20 matches. And the biggest hitters should be relatively high in the batting order. NZ, for instance, bats Jacob Oram too low.

Twenty20 cricket is a newish form of the game. It will be fascinating to see how tactics specifically applicable to the form evolve. So far, I believe, not a great deal of thought has gone into developing specific tactics.

Let’s start this interesting process here.


Free Email updates:

Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...

 

Crowd Says (7)

Reg said  | December 17th 2007 @ 5:59am | Report comment

With regards point 2, I think the balance the Aussies had v the kiwis was fantastic. 5 legitimate strike bowlers. With only 20 overs you really need to be able to back your top order to bat for that long (only 20 overs), therefore stacking your lower order with legitimate bowlers (not part timers like Symonds, Hopes etc) puts the pressure on the opposition, with absolutely no respite during their innings.

Stoffy said  | December 17th 2007 @ 6:13am | Report comment

Top read spiro

My piece of advice would be to pick 8 genuine batsman, leaving a three-man pace attack. Yes you will only get 12 overs out of them but i believe thats all you need. The change of pace and veritety is the best to take wickets and even part time bowlers would appear hard to hit. Michael Clarke can bowl his orthodox and maintain a steady line and length. Thats four bowlers, and people like a symo to role over a handful of his offies and mediums (i know medium pace is not great in twenty20 but he can use his change of pace and spin to his advantage). There we go 20 overs are covered with the likes of Watto and Noffke also avaliable for a throw down and a big hit with the bat.

Andrew McCormack said  | December 17th 2007 @ 1:17pm | Report comment

interesting tactics and they all make perfect sense,

On point #6 I agree about the importance of six hitters in a Twenty20 team however the ability to fluently knock the ball into the right places and take ones should not be looked over. If you look at the amount of singles scored by teams in one-day games- generally the team with the most amount wins. Singles are the things that keeps an innings ticking over, boundaries alone aren’t the answer. Obviously hitting every ball to the rope or over it isn’t possible, the runs that come in between the boundaries I would say are just as important. Hence why the Aussies were looking for plenty of ones early doors to get their innings underway.

greg said  | December 17th 2007 @ 5:17pm | Report comment

Great article Spiro
I think you need at least three, probably four frontline bowlers because as Reg said, you have to rely on your top order to get the job done. I don’t think there is any need for a designated batter at seven or eight because of the length of the game, if you get down to that position and still need to rely on a full-time batter then you are probably going to lose anyway due to the flow of runs being lost early on by losing wickets. As we briefly saw in Perth, part-time bowlers like Symmo are sparodic at best when it comes to Twenty20 form and should only be used very sparingly. The four full-time bowlers will get the job done with one all-rounder (maybe a Hogg-type) picking up the remaining overs. Selecting guys like Watson, Johnson and Lee as your front line pace attack will still give you waggle at the tail-end.

Greg Russell said  | December 20th 2007 @ 10:48am | Report comment

Spiro, I agree particularly with the point about being able to hit sixes. This calls into question the naming of M Clarke as Australian captain, as of all current Australian batsmen, he has the least capacity to clear the boundary. Indeed, just look at his dismissal in Perth: attempting to hit a 6 off Vettori, he was caught at long-on. Those who have followed his one-day career will have seen him dismissed many other times in this exact some way. Given this, one has to wonder whether Clarke should even be in Australia’s T20I side, let alone be captain of it. (And don’t get me wrong, I think Clarke is a fabulously entertaining player with singular talent.)

Aaron Doherty said  | June 20th 2008 @ 10:43am | Report comment

Great Article!
Like in all forms of the cricket runs on the board is the utmost importance. Singles are probably the most important thing.
If a team can hit 2 boundaries at least in an over and four singles, thats at least 12 runs and done consistently should have you near the 180/200 mark.
Having your symonds, Oram, Glichrist like players in your lineup are important but balance with you punchy single getters shouldn’t be overlooked, because as proved by the run drought at the end of the IPL there will be periods where the bowlers get it right and boundries become hard and hitting those singles are important. Because with the bowlers only having a short time to bowl it won’t be long until you can face someone you can get a hold off and catch up the runs with a big over or so.
Pace seems to be the way to go with our bowling, evidenced by our perth 20-20, with your part timers coming in with a change of pace.
Victorias win over tasmania (i think) where hodge bowled himself and hussey to really slow the tigers down and then got on top of them and won the final is evidence that your slower bowlers can be match winners too.

John - Rarotonga said  | November 8th 2008 @ 9:51am | Report comment

excellent article but shouldn’t it be 7 tactics?

Have your Say

If you like this article, Subscribe! Subscribe to our daily email

Please be sure to enter your name and email before submitting this comment. Please also refer to our comments policy

 

Hot debate

What you're Roaring!

  • What do you think?

    Has Hayden played his final Test innings?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...
  • By signing up to the daily The Roar email you'll receive all the new articles and sports opinion that we put up on the website each day - delivered direct into your inbox. For free. We think it's the best way to receive our content.

    Our emails contain the article along with the images - just like on the website.